4 ms·

Maybe the antithesis to the discovery of antibiotics is the mostly accidental discovery of Tabun: "In January 1937, Schrader observed the effects of nerve agent

Maybe the antithesis to the discovery of antibiotics is the mostly accidental discovery of Tabun: "In January 1937, Schrader observed the effects of nerve agents on human beings first-hand when a drop of tabun spilled onto a lab bench." (Wikipedia) I think that one might stand out somewhat since I'd expect most accidental advances to be helpful to humanity. Or maybe I'm just an optimist. :)

jacquesm 9y ago
Scientists that voluntarily work to bring such stuff in the world are amongst the people I least respect. It's one thing to be dumb, quite another to be extraordinarily gifted and to use that gift to do something which has no upside at all and plenty of downside. Exposing them to their own creations would be poetic justice.
- mynameisvlad 9y ago
  I mean, it's not like they're going into it knowing they're about to create a nerve agent. It even says in the history for Tabun on Wikipedia [0] that it was initially meant to be an insecticide. Sarin was similarly created as a way to find stronger pesticides, and IIRC so was Zyklon B, used in the holocaust. So some of these scientists may not have known what their creations were going to be used for. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent)
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    After making a demonstration to the army and being set up with a lab by the army and being asked specifically to weaponize your research (and fill projectiles with it) I don't think there should be any 'we didn't know' excuses. It's pretty clear that even if insecticide was the beginning there was a pretty clear point in time where it was obvious that this had nothing to do with insects any longer.
    - mynameisvlad 9y ago
      And at that point what are they going to do? Say no? Okay, then they'll get someone else to take your work and weaponize it. The bulk of the work would have already been done by then, which is synthesizing the chemical and showing its effects on people.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        Principles are pointless if there is no price to pay. By your reasoning you can excuse away any behavior. Which of course plenty of scientists and other horrible people tried to do. And then there was the collective amnesia epidemic of 1945.
        mynameisvlad 9y ago
        And by your reasoning, you should get locked away the second your research can get weaponized. Shockingly, it's not a black and white world with many layers of gray in between, which is what I was trying to show. That a lot of research can get twisted for evil. In your earlier post, you claimed there was "no upside". That's patently false, since these started with the ideal of getting rid of pests more efficiently. Yes, there's a point where it turns from this generic research to weaponizing, but that might not be immediately obvious at the time, nor what the repercussions might be 50 years later.
        jacquesm 9y ago
        > And by your reasoning, you should get locked away the second your research can get weaponized. No, the second people start weaponizing your research you have the option to stop participating. > Shockingly, it's not a black and white world with many layers of gray in between, which is what I was trying to show. That a lot of research can get twisted for evil. Chemical weapons research is pure evil, I don't doubt that at all. > In your earlier post, you claimed there was "no upside". Yep. > That's patently false, since these started with the ideal of getting rid of pests more efficiently. Yes, there's a point where it turns from this generic research to weaponizing, but that might not be immediately obvious at the time, nor what the repercussions might be 50 years later. It was obvious within the lifetime of the scientists involved because they were the ones to help weaponize it. And for that there are no excuses. I really don't understand why you're twisting so much to come up with excuses for these people here, their role and position in all this is pretty well documented. If not for the Germans fear that allies would be able to retaliate in kind that stuff would have been used. This is one of the best documented era in the history of mankind, there are people who deserve the benefit of the doubt but this particular group isn't one of those.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  >has no upside at all Basically any powerful/impressive weapon can be justified to have upside as it might reduce further casualties by ending conflict sooner. And looking at trench warfare, if there had been a way to make it completely unfeasible by being able to "permanently" poison an entire field at a time, perhaps that would have turned out better.
- Houshalter 9y ago
  Many of the greatest physicists of that generation worked on atomic bombs. And even more were involved in other military technologies. What are you supposed to do, not give your country the best tools possible? Hope the other side is just really nice and does likewise? Risk your country getting conquered? Your family getting killed?
- bansheehash 9y ago
  > It's one thing to be dumb, quite another to be extraordinarily gifted and to use that gift to do something which has no upside at all and plenty of downside One could extend this argument to engineers who work for nefarious, privacy-violating ad companies, invasive surveillance...
iffycan 9y ago
Have a link? I'm not seeing what you're seeing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent)
- jacquesm 9y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent

jacquesm 9y ago

Scientists that voluntarily work to bring such stuff in the world are amongst the people I least respect. It's one thing to be dumb, quite another to be extraordinarily gifted and to use that gift to do something which has no upside at all and plenty of downside. Exposing them to their own creations would be poetic justice.

mynameisvlad 9y ago
I mean, it's not like they're going into it knowing they're about to create a nerve agent. It even says in the history for Tabun on Wikipedia [0] that it was initially meant to be an insecticide. Sarin was similarly created as a way to find stronger pesticides, and IIRC so was Zyklon B, used in the holocaust. So some of these scientists may not have known what their creations were going to be used for. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent)
- jacquesm 9y ago
  After making a demonstration to the army and being set up with a lab by the army and being asked specifically to weaponize your research (and fill projectiles with it) I don't think there should be any 'we didn't know' excuses. It's pretty clear that even if insecticide was the beginning there was a pretty clear point in time where it was obvious that this had nothing to do with insects any longer.
  - mynameisvlad 9y ago
    And at that point what are they going to do? Say no? Okay, then they'll get someone else to take your work and weaponize it. The bulk of the work would have already been done by then, which is synthesizing the chemical and showing its effects on people.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      Principles are pointless if there is no price to pay. By your reasoning you can excuse away any behavior. Which of course plenty of scientists and other horrible people tried to do. And then there was the collective amnesia epidemic of 1945.
      - mynameisvlad 9y ago
        And by your reasoning, you should get locked away the second your research can get weaponized. Shockingly, it's not a black and white world with many layers of gray in between, which is what I was trying to show. That a lot of research can get twisted for evil. In your earlier post, you claimed there was "no upside". That's patently false, since these started with the ideal of getting rid of pests more efficiently. Yes, there's a point where it turns from this generic research to weaponizing, but that might not be immediately obvious at the time, nor what the repercussions might be 50 years later.
        jacquesm 9y ago
        > And by your reasoning, you should get locked away the second your research can get weaponized. No, the second people start weaponizing your research you have the option to stop participating. > Shockingly, it's not a black and white world with many layers of gray in between, which is what I was trying to show. That a lot of research can get twisted for evil. Chemical weapons research is pure evil, I don't doubt that at all. > In your earlier post, you claimed there was "no upside". Yep. > That's patently false, since these started with the ideal of getting rid of pests more efficiently. Yes, there's a point where it turns from this generic research to weaponizing, but that might not be immediately obvious at the time, nor what the repercussions might be 50 years later. It was obvious within the lifetime of the scientists involved because they were the ones to help weaponize it. And for that there are no excuses. I really don't understand why you're twisting so much to come up with excuses for these people here, their role and position in all this is pretty well documented. If not for the Germans fear that allies would be able to retaliate in kind that stuff would have been used. This is one of the best documented era in the history of mankind, there are people who deserve the benefit of the doubt but this particular group isn't one of those.
MichaelGG 9y ago
>has no upside at all Basically any powerful/impressive weapon can be justified to have upside as it might reduce further casualties by ending conflict sooner. And looking at trench warfare, if there had been a way to make it completely unfeasible by being able to "permanently" poison an entire field at a time, perhaps that would have turned out better.
Houshalter 9y ago
Many of the greatest physicists of that generation worked on atomic bombs. And even more were involved in other military technologies. What are you supposed to do, not give your country the best tools possible? Hope the other side is just really nice and does likewise? Risk your country getting conquered? Your family getting killed?
bansheehash 9y ago
> It's one thing to be dumb, quite another to be extraordinarily gifted and to use that gift to do something which has no upside at all and plenty of downside One could extend this argument to engineers who work for nefarious, privacy-violating ad companies, invasive surveillance...

iffycan 9y ago

Have a link? I'm not seeing what you're seeing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tabun_(nerve_agent)

jacquesm 9y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_agent